China has tried just about everything to tame a property market in which home prices sometimes jump around like the value of Bitcoin.

Over the years, in one city or another, it has limited mortgage lending. It has tried to halt purchases of homes by people who already own one. It has plowed billions of dollars into building new homes that regular Chinese people can afford.

Now the Chinese government is considering adopting something that, while familiar to homeowners in the United States and elsewhere, could dramatically reshape the world’s second-largest economy: a property tax.

Tier one are the largest, with tier two and three progressively smaller in scale.

As Dhar explains, the slowdown in China, like Australia’s, largely reflects attempts from policymakers to slow what were rapidly increasing house prices in the previous two years.“Despite the policy clampdown on property prices, mortgage lending is up over 20% [over the] year,” he says.Read more at https://www.businessinsider.com.au/chin ... QmtsTrO.99

As pointed out in various places on the forum many of the international threads are circa 10 years old

Quote:

Many investors snap up homes — in China, they are mostly apartments — hoping to ride a price surge. In the biggest cities, property prices on average have at least doubled over the past eight years. But vast numbers of apartments in many cities lie empty, either because the buyers have no intention of moving in or renting out, or because speculators built homes that nobody wants.

In October, Xi Jinping, China’s president, told the nation that “houses are built to be inhabited, not for speculation.”

Real estate fervor was on display on a chilly recent morning at an apartment complex in the eastern city of Nanjing. Would-be buyers spent the night in tents and under quilts, lined up for a chance to buy. So many cars arrived, according to people who were there and photos that went viral on social media, that traffic seized up for a mile around the sales office.

Mr Xi has a doctrine, "Xi Jinping Thought for the New Era of Socialism with Chinese Special Characteristics". This is Mr Xi's China Dream.

A more powerful military; domestic security (code for winding back human rights, locking up dissidents and potential rivals); asserting Chinese sovereignty; and extending his country's economic reach: these are the hallmarks of the Xi era.

At the centre of it all is the survival of the Communist Party: as The Economist wrote, Mr Xi is "putting the Communist back into Communist China".

Now he will have more time to achieve it: the party is moving to lift the two-term limit on the presidency, clearing the way for Mr Xi to be leader for life.

Interesting to see money or fear talks in Australia:

Quote:

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has refused to buy into China’s clearing the way for President Xi Jinping to stay in power indefinitely, describing Mr Xi as “a very effective leader” and saying the nation’s constitution is its own business.

Mr Xi has a doctrine, "Xi Jinping Thought for the New Era of Socialism with Chinese Special Characteristics". This is Mr Xi's China Dream.

A more powerful military; domestic security (code for winding back human rights, locking up dissidents and potential rivals); asserting Chinese sovereignty; and extending his country's economic reach: these are the hallmarks of the Xi era.

At the centre of it all is the survival of the Communist Party: as The Economist wrote, Mr Xi is "putting the Communist back into Communist China".

Now he will have more time to achieve it: the party is moving to lift the two-term limit on the presidency, clearing the way for Mr Xi to be leader for life.

Interesting to see money or fear talks in Australia:

Quote:

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has refused to buy into China’s clearing the way for President Xi Jinping to stay in power indefinitely, describing Mr Xi as “a very effective leader” and saying the nation’s constitution is its own business.

TBH, while this is going to be bad for dissident Chinese in the short term, and the Chinese people in the long term, its probably a good thing overall for western governments. It pretty much guarantees that China is going to go down a stagnant route, like the Soviet Union. Arguably, while the previous transitions in power were orchestrated to bring in "safe" leaders, the 10 year limit did at least mean a fresh turnover of new leaders and energy.Now the loyalty of up and coming leaders will need to be to a man, not the party. This is probably going to cause a long, slow rundown of the country over time, and there will be much more pent up energy that will only be released when Xi dies, and which is more likely to be all directed internally rather than externally. I can think of plenty of other countries with autocratic leaders that have gone this way and can't think offhand of one where this worked out well.

The US today said it was for China to decide “what is best for their country” after the ruling Communist Party of China (CPC) proposed to abolish presidential term limits, a move that could allow President Xi Jinping to rule for life. “I believe that’s a decision for China to make about what’s best for their country,” White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters at her daily news conference. She said term limits “is something that President Donald Trump supports here, but that’s a decision that would be up to China”. “The President has talked about term limits in a number of capacities during the campaign. It’s something that he supports here in the US. But that’s a decision that would be up to China,” Sanders said.

TBH, while this is going to be bad for dissident Chinese in the short term, and the Chinese people in the long term, its probably a good thing overall for western governments. It pretty much guarantees that China is going to go down a stagnant route, like the Soviet Union. Arguably, while the previous transitions in power were orchestrated to bring in "safe" leaders, the 10 year limit did at least mean a fresh turnover of new leaders and energy.Now the loyalty of up and coming leaders will need to be to a man, not the party. This is probably going to cause a long, slow rundown of the country over time, and there will be much more pent up energy that will only be released when Xi dies, and which is more likely to be all directed internally rather than externally. I can think of plenty of other countries with autocratic leaders that have gone this way and can't think offhand of one where this worked out well.

Never thought about that, but it's an excellent point.Xi has gone down the Castro route.Maduro is also trundling down this path (Most popular opposition, Henrique Capriles is barred from office while Leopoldo Lopez is under house arrest).

I'm stunned at the Chinese for deciding on this measure.Although I'm wondering if they expect some major (internal) conflict as the economy cools and the citizens become restive and see a strong hand as the best counter ?